Nicene Creed

I believe in God, the Father, the Almighty,maker of heaven and earth,and all that is seen and unseen.I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.Through him all things were made.For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven:by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary,and became man.For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried.On the third day he rose againin fulfilment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.He will come again in gloryto judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.I believe in the Holy Spirit,the Lord, the giver of life,who proceeds from the Father and the Son.With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.He has spoken through the Prophets.I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.I look for the resurrection of the dead,and the life of the world to come.Amen

Defeat the HHS

...Original Sin is not a Capital Crime.

The Mission of this Blog

The Mission of this Blog is to bring light and truth to the world of those horrible events which comprise the satanic and masonic attack on Holy Mother Church called the French Revolution, and those attacks which continue today throughout the world.

I shall endevour to confine myself to the historical aspects including those events and persons which inspired, or were inspired by that period of French history, and how they relate to today.

I am a Roman Catholic in good standing, well Baptised and brought up in the Faith.

I am a Monarchist, and therefore I believe that a republican form of government is repugnant, and unsupported by scripture.

I believe that the American Revolution, and French Revolutions, including the Paris commune, were the inspiration for the communist revolutions.

I believe that God and God alone, not the masses, is the source of authority from whom all rulers, including presidents, are soley responsible.

I believe that His Most Christian Majesty in the person of Louis-Alphonse, Duc d'Anjou is the true and rightful King of France, and by God's Grace shall be restored to the ancient throne of France.

Jeanne La Pucelle

About Me

Sieur de Brantigny, dit Boisvert, witnessed by the Blessed Mother and the whole Court of Heaven, do solemnly swear by the Holy Gospels (which I touch with my hand) to be loyal and true to Monseigneur le Prince, Louis, le duc d'Anjou, de jure His Most Christian Majesty, Louis XX, by God's Grace King of France and Navarre and that I will do all that lays in my power to bring about his restoration to the Throne of his forefathers and the instauration of the Social Reign of the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts in France and throughout the world. So help me God.
Vive Le Roi! Vive le Roi! Vive le Roi!
.............................
Ret Marine, 22.5 yrs A/D 01/11/73-09/01/95. Member DAV,
Catechist Diocese of Richmond Va.

Followers

The "Cocarde Blanche" Award

Click on the Prince to see the current awardees

Prayer of Saint Richard

Thanks be to Thee, my Lord Jesus Christ,For all the benefits Thou hast won for me,For all the pains and insults Thou hast borne for me.O most merciful Redeemer, Friend, and Brother,May I know Thee more clearly,Love Thee more dearly,And follow Thee more nearly:For ever and ever.

“The administration's only concession was to give our institutions a one-year delay to comply,” he said in a Feb. 2 letter. “This is not merely inadequate. It is dangerous. And it betrays the good faith of many Catholics who – until now – have supported the current administration with an honest will.”

Archbishop Chaput is one of over 140 U.S. bishops who have spoke out against the Health and Human Services rules finalized Jan. 20, which require most new health plans to provide contraception and sterilization – including drugs that can cause an abortion – without a co-pay.

Most religious institutions will not be able to opt out, though HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius gave them an additional year to meet the requirements.

In a letter distributed to parishes to be read at Feb. 5 Sunday Masses, Archbishop Chaput said Catholic institutions “cannot comply with this unjust law without compromising our convictions and undermining the Catholic identity of many of our service ministries.”

“This is not just another important issue among the many we need to be concerned about,” he stated.

“This ruling is different. This ruling interferes with the basic right of Catholic citizens to organize and work for the common good as Catholics in the public square.”

On Feb. 1, White House Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Muñoz issued a response to critics of the mandate. She stressed the existence of a religious exemption, cited Guttmacher Institute statistics about contraceptive use among Catholics, and said the mandate excluded abortion-causing drugs.

The exemption, however, applies only to institutions that primarily employ and serve members of the same faith for the purpose of inculcating religious values.

Meanwhile, the emergency contraceptive “Ella” – covered without a co-pay under the mandate – can prevent the survival of a living embryo, and thus qualifies as an abortifacient drug according to the U.S. bishops' Ethical and Religious directives.

In his letter, Archbishop Chaput indicated that the issue at hand had nothing to do with any particular individual's decision to contracept, but was primarily a matter of institutions' right to act in accordance with religious convictions.

But individuals and non-religious institutions, he noted, would also be subject to state coercion.

“Almost all health insurers will be forced to include those 'services' in the health policies they write. And almost all individuals will be forced to buy that coverage as a part of their policies.”

He urged Catholics to educate themselves with the resources of the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and said they should contact their congressional representatives in the House and Senate.

“Your action on this issue matters – not just today but for many years to come; and in ways that will shape the ability of the Church to witness the Gospel publicly through her ministries well into the future.”

The USCCB has made us this bed and now we the faithful are being made to sleep in it. It is time for more Bishops like Arch-Bishop Chaput to stand on their legs and decry in public the evil of this administration.

2.2.12

This is a dream for the pro-abortion crowd who can now see millions coming in to destroy babies which could have been avoided had the "Pill" only worked.

Of course I am being sarcastic! This should however highlight the point that only God can creat a baby and the best plans of man to avoid that miracle are simply a waste of time.

Fr Ken Brenny told me once, "...Stop trying to do Gods job..." When oh Lord will we stop trying to play You?

..Defective Birth Control Could Spur Big Lawsuits for Pfizer

By Rachael Rettner

It's possible that women who become pregnant after taking the defective birth control pills Pfizer recalled on February 1 could sue the drug company for unwanted pregnancies, experts say. And they could ask for a lot of money.

Courts have typically thought about so-called wrongful pregnancy cases as similar to medical malpractice, said I. Glenn Cohen, assistant professor and co-director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School. Similar cases have allowed people to sue for things like unwanted pregnancies after botched vasectomies. In the past, there has even been a case in which a woman successfully sued a pharmacist for a pregnancy that resulted from errors in filling the woman's birth control prescriptions, Cohen said.

The best chance for a case, however, would be for affected women with unwanted pregnancies to band together and bring a class-action lawsuit against Pfizer, said Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. Such a case could ask for considerably more money than an individual case, and would be more attractive to lawyers, Caplan said.

Another appealing aspect of a class-action lawsuit is that, by pooling people together, a case avoids singling out any individual child who, if it weren't for a defective birth control pill, might not otherwise exist, Caplan said. "Judges and juries don’t tend to want to say 'You'd be better off if you didn’t exist,'" Caplan said.

Just how much money a class-action lawsuit could seek depends on where the suit is filed, Cohen said. Thirty-two states recognize "wrongful pregnancy cases," in which a healthy baby is born from an unwanted pregnancy. Of these states, most allow women to sue for damages related to the cost of the pregnancy itself, and in some states, the cost of emotional distresses from an unwanted pregnancy, and the cost of taking time off from work, Cohen said.

A limited number of states allow women to ask for economic expenses related to raising the child until he or she is 18 years old, which could be hundreds of thousands of dollars in each case.

If many women took part in a class-action suit that sought the price of raising each of the children until the age of 18, "that's a lot of money," Cohen said.

However, before a class-action case can be brought against Pfizer, it would need to be certified by a court, which has become more difficult in recent years, Cohen said.

Moreover, if there are significant differences between the women's cases, it could be even harder for the suit to be certified, Cohen said. For example, if some of the women had healthy babies and some had unhealthy babies, they would file different types of lawsuits, Cohen said. An unhealthy baby would mean a woman would need to file a "wrongful birth" lawsuit.

Other factors could complicate the case. For instance, the cause of the pregnancy could be called into question — Pfizer could allege that a woman had misused the product, and the pregnancy did not result from a faulty product, Cohen said.

Women may also be reluctant to come forward to file a case against Pfizer. Some women may not want others to know they are using birth control, Caplan said. Others may not want to argue in court that they would be better off without their child, he said.

Pfizer has said that the pills in the recalled birth control packages do not pose health risks to the women that take them, but that they may not prevent pregnancy. Women taking the recalled products should being taking non-hormonal birth control immediately, the company said.

On February 10, 1638, French King Louis XIII, to thank (in advance!) the Virgin Mary on behalf of himself and his kingdom for the birth of a royal heir--the future Louis XIV--and to prove his absolute trust, made a vow of consecration of his person, his family and France to Our Lady of the Assumption. This vow was published as a royal edict and reads as follows (unabridged):

"God who raises kings to their throne of greatness, not being content with imparting us with the spirit befitting all earthly princes for the conduct of their people, wished to take such special care of our person and State that we cannot consider the happiness of our reign without discerning as many wonderful marks of his goodness as there were perilous accidents.

When we entered the government of this crown, the weakness of our age gave license to a few ill spirits to trouble its tranquility; but this divine hand so forcefully supported the justice of our cause that the same day witnessed the beginning and the end of those pernicious designs. On several other occasions, men's artifice and the devil's malice had caused and fomented divisions that were no less dangerous for our crown than prejudicial to the rest of our house, and it pleased God to divert evil from it with as much sweetness as justice. The heretical rebellion also had formed a party in the State, with no other aim than to divide our authority, so God used us to crush its pride, and permitted that we could rebuild his holy altars in all the places where the violence of that unjust party had removed them.

When we set about to protect our allies he gave such happy successes to our arms that in the sight of all of Europe, against the hope of all, we reestablished them in the possession of the States of which they had been deprived. If the greatest forces of this crown's enemies banded together to plot its ruin, He confounded their ambitious plans to show all nations that, since it was his providence which founded this State, his bounty is preserving it and his power defends it.

Taking the most holy and glorious Virgin as the special protectress of our kingdom, we consecrate in a particular way our person, our State, our crown and our subjects

So many evident graces have been received that we do not want to differ our gratitude or to wait for a peace which will come from the same hand who issued them and which we desire ardently, to share its fruits with the peoples we are committed to serve ; thus, bowing at the foot of his divine majesty whom we adore in three persons, before the Blessed Virgin and the sacred cross, where we venerate the accomplishment of the mysteries of our redemption through the life and death of the Son of God in our flesh, we felt compelled to consecrate ourselves to the greatness of God through his Son who lowered himself to us, and to his Son raised up to him by his mother; in whose protection we place in particular our person, State, crown and all our subjects, to obtain thereby the protection of the Holy Trinity, through his intercession and that of the whole heavenly court by his authority and example, since our hands are not pure enough to present our offering to Purity itself, we trust that the hands that were worthy to carry him will make them agreeable hosts; and it seems reasonable to think that she who mediated to obtain for us these benefits will mediate on our behalf to give thanks to God.

To this end, we have declared and we declare that, taking the very holy and glorious Virgin Mary as special protectress of our kingdom, we particularly consecrate to her our own Self, the State, our Crown and our subjects, entreating her to inspire in us a holy conduct and to so diligently defend this kingdom against the endeavors of all its enemies that, whether it suffers the plague of war or enjoys the sweetness of the peace we implore from God from the depth of our heart, it may never depart from the path of grace leading to the path to glory. And so that posterity does not fail to follow our will in the matter, as a monument and immortal sign of the present consecration that we are making, we shall build anew the great altar of the Cathedral of Paris with an image of the Virgin holding in her arms her precious Son descended from the Cross and representing us at the foot of the Son and the Mother as offering to them our crown and our scepter.

We notify the Lord Archbishop of Paris and nevertheless order him that every year, on the feast of the Assumption, he should commemorate our present declaration at High Mass, which will be said in his cathedral church, and that after that day's vespers, a procession should be made within the said church, which will be attended by all the sovereign companies and corps de ville, with the same ceremonials which are observed for the most solemn general processions. We also wish this to be done in all the churches, both in parishes as well as in monasteries of the said town and suburbs, and in all the towns, market towns and villages of the said diocese of Paris.

We similarly exhort the archbishops and bishops of our Kingdom, and nevertheless order them, to have the same solemn celebrations in their Episcopal churches, and others of their dioceses, being understood that at the said ceremony the members of parliament and other sovereign companies, and the principal officers of the towns should be present, and to notify all the people to have a special devotion to the Virgin, on that day to implore her protection, so that, under so powerful a patron, our Kingdom will be protected from all the wiles of our enemies and enjoy a good and lasting peace, that God will be served and revered in such a holy way that we and our subjects may happily reach the final end for which we have all been created, such is our wish."

Given in Saint-Germain-en-Laye, the tenth day of February, in the year of grace one thousand six hundred and thirty eight and the 28th of our Reign.

Louis"

When Louis XIII proclaimed the Vow, Queen Anne of Austria, his wife, was two-month pregnant. On September 5, 1638, she gave birth to a boy who received the name of Louis Dieudonné (God Given), the future Louis XIV. The feast of the Assumption, celebrated on August 15, is officially, since that vow, a French national holiday.

31.1.12

...Who is the better off then? Surely, it is the man who will suffer something for God. Many unstable and weak-minded people say: "See how well that man lives, how rich, how great he is, how powerful and mighty." But you must lift up your eyes to the riches of heaven and realize that the material goods of which they speak are nothing. These things are uncertain and very burdensome because they are never possessed without anxiety and fear. Man's happiness does not consist in the possession of abundant goods; a very little is enough...Thomas A Kempis,Imitation of Christ

This morning I listened to a morning radio program make a comparison between Michelle Obama and Marie-Antoinette. My stomach turned abit as I heard yet once again to the calumies of the French revolution plied against the Queen Martyr. Michelle Obama is not even a shadow of the woman that was Marie-Antoinette.

I have not done all the research I possibly could have on Marie-Antoinette. For that I rely on the writings of others, primarily those of Elena-Maria Vidal and her works on the Queen Martyr. I have lived in the time of Diana. Others have presented the contrast between Saint Teresa of Calcutta and Diana. I present a contrast between two princesses, one English the other Austrian by birth, French by choice.

In this day I can still see the heartbreak, tears, wringing of hands as the British people come to grips with the death of Diana. Her sons Harry and William have kept alive the memory of their mother in the minds of the people of Great Britain and the world at large. Films have been made to memorialize and lionize her. At her recent memorial, the famous attended and the not so famous watched on in awe as the Diana's life was recounted. The media was fueled with reports of her death; Was it a plot by MI-5, the Queen, or Charles to have the rebellious princess removed and thereby clear the way for Charles to remarry? Was Diana pregnant with Dodi Fayed's baby? Was the driver drunk? Were the paparazzi to blame? ...And on and on and on. The conspiracy theorists point out that since there is no evidence of a conspiracy there must in fact have been a conspiracy. (?)

What exactly did Diana do for the British? As a royal in a constitutional Britain her only real job was to look pretty for the camera, smile, say some witty thing and go on to the next media event. While I am sure that she did in fact feel sorrow and pity over the sick children she visited, her appearances in at church and in prayer were less frequently photographed. In her desire to end misery she attempted to ban land mines, but was thwarted because it that is unverifiable, but it was such a nice thing to do and it is the thought that counts.

Frankly one could get sickened by the coverage of the media slobbering over every new shopping event, the dress she was wearing, who did her hair and how thin she looked. Any amount of money spent was a pittance compared to how she looked and presented herself on camera. No one ever to my knowledge mentioned how her mostly unlimited funds were being spent. She was the darling of the media, and because of that the people were thrilled. In their eyes she could make no mistakes. When the stories of the Princess's and Prince of Wales infidelities were made public, she was pitied. "Of course HE drove her to do it". The stories, mostly true, where and still are the talk of newspaper, scandal sheets in supermarkets, and late night talk shows. There seems to be no shame in anything she did. I will repeat, "no shame". Infidelity, expensive vacations, clothes all alluded by a sycophant press and people as her right.

Contrast that with the Queen martyr, Marie-Antoinette. Married at 14 in a land far from home, demeaned and insulted at every turn by Madame du Berry, (the kings Louis XV's mistress). Marie-Antoinette was in her youth full of exuberance, but exuberance tempered by piety, and Christian Charity. Which child at 14 does not have exuberance, Joie-de-vivre? In her youth she gambled as did almost everyone during the period, and while her debts were sometimes huge the king never failed to make them good. As the finances of the Kingdom worsened by aid to the American rebels, she tightened her expenditures and retreated into the bosom of her family. A refuge in times of trouble. In a later time she would come to have 4 children, two of which she would bury, her first born and her last born, breaking her heart. Only a mother can know the loss of a child and feel the loss as profoundly and utterly as she did. To lose two was only more intense in heartache. Yet every type of calumny was heaped upon her by foes whom she did not know, when reply would have been beneath her dignity. Her friendship with Count Fersen, was expanded by popular imagination to a love affair. The affair of the necklace used by her enemies to expose their so called extravagances, was a lie heaped upon a lie. Compare that to Diana who went on TV to "confess" her dalliances.

During the terror she watched as her loyal friends were taken from her one by one and killed for no better reason than they were her friends. They could have denounced her and saved their lives but they did not. True friends do not abandon. She watched as her only love and husband was taken and unjustly murdered.

Her own trial was contrived by the committee to include such vile and contemptible charges that to this day one must get special permission from the French Government to read the largely pornographic charges used to martyr her. Imagine her feelings as she was led away to her death. She must have felt a pang of pain knowing that her last two children were left to the mercy of the mob. She arrived at her death, beaten but not cowed. She was secure in the knowledge that she was going to God. In His Hands she placed her soul and arrived bathed in the odor of sanctity.

Little do people realize that Princess Diana died with in sight of where Marie-Antoinette died.

Now that I think on it, I was mistaken, there is no real comparison.

Not in the princesses, certainly not in the people.

Much thanks to Mdm Elena Maria Vidal, whose book Trianon inspired this article.

30.1.12

Treason is an ugly word. It is even more so when it is applied to those who are sentenced to die for it. Stephanie A. Mann relates in her blog entry today...

...Sir Everard Digby, Robert Wintour, John Grant, and Thomas Bates, four of the surviving Gunpowder Plotters were executed in St. Paul's Churchyard on January 30, 1606. They and the other conspirators had been tried on January 27th in Westminster Hall... go to the link above to read the rest.

In a letter vaguly reminiscent of the reply of Captain Durler to the mob at the Tuilleries, the Bishops of the United States were asked to have read this letter... (this one was personalized by Alexander K. Sample, Bishop of Marquette).

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

I write to you concerning an alarming and serious matter that negatively impacts the Church in the United States directly, and that strikes at the fundamental right to religious liberty for all citizens of any faith. The federal government, which claims to be “of, by, and for the people,” has just been dealt a heavy blow to almost a quarter of those people — the Catholic population — and to the millions more who are served by the Catholic faithful.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced last week that almost all employers, including Catholic employers, will be forced to offer their employees’ health coverage that includes sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs, and contraception. Almost all health insurers will be forced to include those “services” in the health policies they write. And almost all individuals will be forced to buy that coverage as a part of their policies.

In so ruling, the Obama Administration has cast aside the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation’s first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. And as a result, unless the rule is overturned, we Catholics will be compelled to either violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees (and suffer the penalties for doing so). The Obama Administration’s sole concession was to give our institutions one year to comply.

We cannot—we will not—comply with this unjust law. People of faith cannot be made second class citizens. We are already joined by our brothers and sisters of all faiths and many others of good will in this important effort to regain our religious freedom. Our parents and grandparents did not come to these shores to help build America’s cities and towns, its infrastructure and institutions, its enterprise and culture, only to have their posterity stripped of their God given rights. In generations past, the Church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. I hope and trust she can count on this generation of Catholics to do the same. Our children and grandchildren deserve nothing less.

And therefore, I would ask of you two things. First, as a community of faith we must commit ourselves to prayer and fasting that wisdom and justice may prevail, and religious liberty may be restored. Without God, we can do nothing; with God, nothing is impossible. Second, I would also recommend visiting www.usccb.org/conscience,to learn more about this severe assault on religious liberty, and how to contact Congress in support of legislation that would reverse the Obama Administration’s decision.

As in 1792 the fight has just started. It is unfortunate that this Bishop and the other Bishops who had this letter read relies on law, “of, by, and for the people,”.Laws made by men are fleeting, "...and change like the inconstant moon, that monthly changes in her circled orb". It is Gods law by which men need to present themsleves. Reliance on a government's laws are foolish. It was by man's law that abortion was "found" to be in the constitution and declared constitutional by a court meant to uphold the law, “of, by, and for the people,”. If a case can be found to allow abortion, (er "a womans right to choose") in the constitution by what guarentee can we expect that a consitutional mandate will not be found that requires abortion?

Religious Liberty will not be restored until we stand up and prepare ourselves to be marytred for the faith.

Be prepared the time will come when you will have to make the choice, Catholic for God, or man for state.